1. Mr. M. N. Krishanamani, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioners submits that reading of the impugned judgment passed by
the Central Administrative Tribunal would show that facts of OA No.
971/2002 being the case of S. N. Dixit & Ors. Vs. Union of India &
Ors. were the entire base of the impugned judgment whereas the case
of the present petitioners is factually different and had the facts of the
present petitioners been taken into consideration, the result of the OA
would have been absolutely different. Counsel further submits that
the Tribunal would have taken into consideration that the persons
junior to the petitioners are being paid higher pension than the
petitioners and would not have simply rejected the OA on the ground
W.P.(C) 9765/2015 Page 1 of 2
of decision being a policy matter.
Source: Indian Kanoon